用单纸点提取龈下生物膜样品中细菌DNA的三种商用试剂盒的比较试验研究。

IF 5.5 2区 医学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Journal of Oral Microbiology Pub Date : 2025-08-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20002297.2025.2549035
Janine Wäge-Recchioni, Renke Perduns, Kirstin Vach, Angela Beckedorf, Joachim Volk, Nadine Schlueter, Ingmar Staufenbiel
{"title":"用单纸点提取龈下生物膜样品中细菌DNA的三种商用试剂盒的比较试验研究。","authors":"Janine Wäge-Recchioni, Renke Perduns, Kirstin Vach, Angela Beckedorf, Joachim Volk, Nadine Schlueter, Ingmar Staufenbiel","doi":"10.1080/20002297.2025.2549035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In periodontal research, subgingival biofilm samples are typically collected using sterile paper points and pooled for molecular analyses. Streamlining this process by using a single paper point for molecular analysis could simplify sample collection and allow additional paper points to be used for other investigations. This pilot study evaluated the performance of three commercial DNA extraction kits for analysing small sample volumes (<10 µL).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Samples were collected from six participants, each contributing 18 paper points from both healthy and periodontitis-affected sites. Bacterial and human DNA yields were quantified using fluorometric measurements combined with qPCR, employing universal 16S primers for bacterial DNA and human-specific GAPDH primers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the tested kits, the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit demonstrated the highest efficiency, yielding significantly more total dsDNA in samples from healthy sites compared to both other kits and in samples from periodontitis-affected sites compared to one kit. Bacterial DNA yields were also significantly higher with the DNeasy Kit compared to one of the other kits in both health conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest that one paper point is sufficient to extract DNA for subsequent bacterial analyses and that the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit appears to be the most efficient among the three tested kits.</p>","PeriodicalId":16598,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Microbiology","volume":"17 1","pages":"2549035"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372513/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative pilot study of three commercial kits for bacterial DNA extraction from human subgingival biofilm samples collected with a single paper point.\",\"authors\":\"Janine Wäge-Recchioni, Renke Perduns, Kirstin Vach, Angela Beckedorf, Joachim Volk, Nadine Schlueter, Ingmar Staufenbiel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20002297.2025.2549035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In periodontal research, subgingival biofilm samples are typically collected using sterile paper points and pooled for molecular analyses. Streamlining this process by using a single paper point for molecular analysis could simplify sample collection and allow additional paper points to be used for other investigations. This pilot study evaluated the performance of three commercial DNA extraction kits for analysing small sample volumes (<10 µL).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Samples were collected from six participants, each contributing 18 paper points from both healthy and periodontitis-affected sites. Bacterial and human DNA yields were quantified using fluorometric measurements combined with qPCR, employing universal 16S primers for bacterial DNA and human-specific GAPDH primers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the tested kits, the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit demonstrated the highest efficiency, yielding significantly more total dsDNA in samples from healthy sites compared to both other kits and in samples from periodontitis-affected sites compared to one kit. Bacterial DNA yields were also significantly higher with the DNeasy Kit compared to one of the other kits in both health conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest that one paper point is sufficient to extract DNA for subsequent bacterial analyses and that the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit appears to be the most efficient among the three tested kits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral Microbiology\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"2549035\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372513/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral Microbiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20002297.2025.2549035\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20002297.2025.2549035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在牙周研究中,牙龈下生物膜样本通常是用无菌纸点收集并汇集进行分子分析。通过使用单个纸点进行分子分析来简化这一过程,可以简化样品收集,并允许将额外的纸点用于其他研究。本初步研究评估了三种用于分析小样本量的商业DNA提取试剂盒的性能(方法:从六名参与者中收集样本,每人从健康和牙周炎影响部位贡献18个论文分。采用通用的16S引物和人类特异性的GAPDH引物对细菌和人的DNA产量进行定量,并结合qPCR进行荧光测量。结果:在测试的试剂盒中,DNeasy血液和组织试剂盒显示出最高的效率,与其他试剂盒相比,在健康部位的样本中产生的总dsDNA明显高于其他试剂盒,在牙周炎感染部位的样本中产生的总dsDNA明显高于一种试剂盒。在两种健康条件下,与其他试剂盒相比,使用DNeasy试剂盒的细菌DNA产量也显着更高。结论:这些结果表明,一个纸点足以提取DNA用于后续的细菌分析,并且dnasy血液和组织试剂盒似乎是三个测试试剂盒中效率最高的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative pilot study of three commercial kits for bacterial DNA extraction from human subgingival biofilm samples collected with a single paper point.

Comparative pilot study of three commercial kits for bacterial DNA extraction from human subgingival biofilm samples collected with a single paper point.

Comparative pilot study of three commercial kits for bacterial DNA extraction from human subgingival biofilm samples collected with a single paper point.

Comparative pilot study of three commercial kits for bacterial DNA extraction from human subgingival biofilm samples collected with a single paper point.

Objective: In periodontal research, subgingival biofilm samples are typically collected using sterile paper points and pooled for molecular analyses. Streamlining this process by using a single paper point for molecular analysis could simplify sample collection and allow additional paper points to be used for other investigations. This pilot study evaluated the performance of three commercial DNA extraction kits for analysing small sample volumes (<10 µL).

Methods: Samples were collected from six participants, each contributing 18 paper points from both healthy and periodontitis-affected sites. Bacterial and human DNA yields were quantified using fluorometric measurements combined with qPCR, employing universal 16S primers for bacterial DNA and human-specific GAPDH primers.

Results: Among the tested kits, the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit demonstrated the highest efficiency, yielding significantly more total dsDNA in samples from healthy sites compared to both other kits and in samples from periodontitis-affected sites compared to one kit. Bacterial DNA yields were also significantly higher with the DNeasy Kit compared to one of the other kits in both health conditions.

Conclusion: These results suggest that one paper point is sufficient to extract DNA for subsequent bacterial analyses and that the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit appears to be the most efficient among the three tested kits.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.40%
发文量
52
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: As the first Open Access journal in its field, the Journal of Oral Microbiology aims to be an influential source of knowledge on the aetiological agents behind oral infectious diseases. The journal is an international forum for original research on all aspects of ''oral health''. Articles which seek to understand ''oral health'' through exploration of the pathogenesis, virulence, host-parasite interactions, and immunology of oral infections are of particular interest. However, the journal also welcomes work that addresses the global agenda of oral infectious diseases and articles that present new strategies for treatment and prevention or improvements to existing strategies. Topics: ''oral health'', microbiome, genomics, host-pathogen interactions, oral infections, aetiologic agents, pathogenesis, molecular microbiology systemic diseases, ecology/environmental microbiology, treatment, diagnostics, epidemiology, basic oral microbiology, and taxonomy/systematics. Article types: original articles, notes, review articles, mini-reviews and commentaries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信